Classification criteria for rheumatic diseases: Why and how?письмо
Аннотация: , Johnsonet al report the results of a systematic literature research onthe main psychometric properties of classification criteriafor rheumatic diseases (1). A previous editorial (2), writtenby members of the American College of Rheumatology(ACR) Classification and Response Criteria Subcommitteeof the Committee on Quality Measures, emphasized themain steps to follow when proposing classification and/orresponder criteria, and in their article, Johnson et al giveuseful additional information on this topic.The main scientific societies in rheumatology, such asthe ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism(EULAR), strongly support research in the field of classi-fication or responder criteria and have promoted appropri-ate standing committees for this purpose. Within EULAR,there are 2 committees dealing with criteria: the StandingCommittee of Epidemiology, and the Standing Committeefor International Studies Including Clinical Trials. Withinthe ACR, the Committee on Quality Measures is in chargeof this aspect.The role of the ACR and EULAR in defining criteria is topromote procedures that are useful for optimizing the col-laboration between experts in a rheumatologic field ofinterest (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis,gout, osteoarthritis, etc.) and experts in the field of clinicalepidemiology (3). Most experts in a specific field of rheu-matology are not also experts in the field of clinical epi-demiology and, therefore, might not be the appropriatepeople to plan, conduct, and analyze studies in order topropose criteria for rheumatic diseases. Similarly, mostexperts in clinical epidemiology are not also experts inspecific topics of rheumatic disorders. There is a need tocombine their expertise. Therefore, the role of the appro-priate EULAR and ACR committee is to help colleagueswho are experts in a specific field and are planning topropose criteria by providing them with expertise in thefield of clinical epidemiology.Such expertise can be provided by obtaining a criticalreview of applications by the appropriate committee, or byproposing a clinical epidemiologist to be part of the taskforce aimed at proposing criteria. In the latter case, whichis the current EULAR procedure for the elaboration ofrecommendations (3), it is mandatory for each task force topropose both a convener, who is usually the expert in thefield of research, and a clinical epidemiologist, who maybe inexperienced in the specific disease. For example,Bernard Combe and Robert Landewe´ acted as the convenerand clinical epidemiologist, respectively, for the EULARrecommendations for management of early arthritis (4).A basis for recommendations and procedures proposedby the ACR Classification and Response Criteria Subcom-mittee of the Committee on Quality Measures with regardto the elaboration and validation steps of criteria for rheu-matic diseases has been explicitly described in the articleby Johnson et al (1). It should be emphasized that due tothescreeningtechniqueJohnsonetalusedinselectingsetsof criteria to assess, their review is not exhaustive of allexisting sets of criteria, but rather is aimed at raisingawareness of methodologic issues regarding diagnosticand classification criteria. This article is a basis for furtherresearch in the field of criteria (i.e., it can be used as afuture work agenda). We strongly recommend readingtheir Methods section carefully, as we feel that it reflectsthe suggestions of the ACR Quality Measures Committee,which were presented in an earlier editorial in
Год издания: 2007
Авторы: Maxime Dougados, Laure Gossec
Издательство: Wiley
Источник: Arthritis Care & Research
Ключевые слова: Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies, Spondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments, Autoimmune and Inflammatory Disorders Research
Другие ссылки: Arthritis Care & Research (HTML)
PubMed (HTML)
PubMed (HTML)
Открытый доступ: closed
Том: 57
Выпуск: 7
Страницы: 1112–1115